A Crack In Bush's Facade - page 2

Care to comment? Published on Friday, June 27, 2003 by Ted Rall A Crack In Bush's Facade by Ted Rall MINNEAPOLIS--Bush lied... Read More

  1. by   Mkue
    SH may have disarmed during the 4 year period when inspectors were not allowed in.

    There was no way for anyone to know if he did or not, including President Bush.

    It wouldn't matter if we found TONS of WMD b/c some ppl would cry that we planted them or that they were fake.

    So it really doesn't matter if we find them or not. Democrats need another platform besides calling President Bush a liar. It's just not enough to run on and win an election. I'll be looking for them to discuss the real issues.
  2. by   pickledpepperRN
    Originally posted by Susy K
    Well frankly, I'm glad Bush didn't decide to use my city or town as the litmus test to confirm intelligence 110%. He took a risk and I for one am glad he didn't risk us.
    I am afraid that wherever we live our city or town has been affected by the troops called up, killed, state budget deficits, and/or decreased federal money. We have a huge federal debt, unemployment, school, police, healthcare,, and/or sanitation cuts. Where I live the airport is probably most secure but what about the ship coming into the port? The trains and busses (minimal if any security. The border? Domestic and foreign terrorists?
    People who have been paying into Medicare all their working lives are being LIED to and encouraged to let a private HMO take over! Just look at the BIG buildings they own where NOBODY does any healthcare!
    Most of my tax money went for defense. Sorry if my opinion is that my nursing work was valuable but much of my tax money was used for a war that (to me) caused more harm than good.

    I am sure that in Iraq no one would have had to worry if they praised SH. To my knowledge NO US President has escaped critisism
    We say we are GOVERNMENT OF THE PEOPLE.
    Is it OK to lie to the people about why we started this war.
    Remember the sign "MISSION ACCOMPLISHED"?
    Is it over? Is it wrong to be sceptical? This is NOT a dictatorship.

    "Wishes don't make things come true." Fred Rogers
  3. by   pickledpepperRN
    CNN has called the Cato Institute a CONSERVATIVE THINK TANK.
    I thought it too until going to their web site.

    Cato Intitute: what they say about themselves, "The Cato Institute was founded in 1977 by Edward H. Crane. It is a non-profit public policy research foundation headquartered in Washington, D.C. The Institute is named for Cato's Letters, a series of libertarian pamphlets that helped lay the philosophical foundation for the American Revolution. "

    http://www.cato.org/dailys/06-19-03.html
    June 19, 2003

    The Case of the Missing WMDs

    by Gene Healy

    Gene Healy is senior editor at the Cato Institute.

    Some war critics can barely contain their glee about the missing Iraqi weapons of
    mass destruction. But they may be setting themselves up for a fall. As the Bush
    administration constantly reminds us, Iraq is a big country, and the weapons may
    yet turn up. If they do, does that mean the administration is vindicated?

    Hardly. The focus on missing weapons threatens to obscure the larger point: that
    with or without chemical and biological weapons, Iraq was never a national
    security threat to the United States.

    The proposition that Saddam Hussein was willing to hand over WMD to terrorists
    appears to have been based on sheer speculation, and implausible speculation
    at that. Despite over 20 years of supporting terror against Israel, Hussein never
    turned over chemical or biological weapons to Palestinian terror groups,
    reasoning, correctly, that such action would provoke massive retaliation. Still less
    was he likely to hand over such weapons to Al Qaeda, a group that has long
    opposed his "socialist infidel" rule and could not trust to keep the deal secret.

    Moreover, Al Qaeda's behavior suggests that they never expected Saddam to give
    them WMD. Computer hard drives and paper documents seized in the March 1
    capture of Khalid Sheik Mohammed, a top-level Al Qaeda operative, reveal that the
    terror group had extensive plans to produce chemical and biological agents on its
    own. As the Washington Post reported on March 23, the documents show that Al
    Qaeda had recruited competent scientists and extensively mapped out its plans
    for anthrax production. If access to Iraqi WMD was a real possibility, why would Al
    Qaeda go to such lengths to produce its own?

    And even if one believed the administration's assertions that Hussein might risk
    destroying his regime by giving Al Qaeda WMD, it was obvious that a war aimed at
    overthrowing Hussein would greatly increase the chances of those weapons
    ending up in Al Qaeda's hands. What possible disincentive could the Iraqi dictator
    have to transferring his arsenal to terrorists, once regime-change was underway
    and he had nothing left to lose? How could the administration ensure that Iraqi
    WMD would not be "privatized" and sold to the highest bidder in the chaos
    accompanying the collapse of the Baathist regime?

    In fact, components for a "dirty bomb" may already be in the wrong hands. A large
    nuclear-material storage facility at Al Tuwaitha, south of Baghdad, was looted in
    the days following the war, and International Atomic Energy Agency officials fear
    that terrorists could make radiological bombs with the isotopes that have gone
    missing. What other dangerous materials or proscribed weapons have we lost
    track of in a "country the size of California"?

    Sometime in the coming months, U.S. forces may well happen upon some VX
    canisters or anthrax stockpiles, and the administration will breathe a sigh of relief.
    Such a discovery may change the media's focus, but it can't change the facts: This
    war did not avert a serious threat to the United States. Instead, it may have created
    new ones.
    1000 Massachusetts Avenue, N.W. Washington D.C. 20001-5403
    Phone (202) 842-0200 Fax (202) 842-3490
    All Rights Reserved 2003 Cato Institute
  4. by   pickledpepperRN
    http://www.thenation.com/capitalgame...?bid=3&pid=783
    George W. Bush misled the nation into war.
    Who says?
    Representative Jane Harman, the ranking Democrat on the House intelligence committee.
    On the basis of what?
    On the basis of information preliminarily reviewed by the intelligence committee as part of its ongoing investigation into the prewar intelligence on Iraq.
    On June 25, during the House debate on the intelligence authorization bill, Harman delivered an informal progress report on her committee's inquiry. Her remarks received, as far as I can tell, little media attention. But they are dramatic in that these comments are the first quasi-findings from an official outlet confirming that Bush deployed dishonest rhetoric in guiding the United States to invasion and occupation in Iraq. This is not an op-ed judgment; this is an evaluation from a member of the intelligence committee who claims to be basing her statements on the investigative work of the committee. Here's what she says:
    * On Bush's prewar assertions about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction: "When discussing Iraq's WMD, administration officials rarely included the caveats and qualifiers attached to the intelligence committee's judgments....For many Americans, the administration's certainty gave the impression that there was even stronger intelligence about Iraq's possession of and intention to use WMD."
    * On the evidence upon which the WMD assertions were based: "The committee is now investigating whether the intelligence case on Iraq's WMD was based on circumstantial evidence rather than hard facts and whether the intelligence community made clear to the policy-makers and Congress that most of its analytic judgments were based on things like aerial photographs and Iraqi defector interviews, not hard facts."
  5. by   pickledpepperRN
    Published on Monday, June 30, 2003 by the San Mateo County Times (California)
    One Republican Against Bush
    by Amelia Hansen

    SAN MATEO -- The keynote speaker at Sunday's 2003 Peninsula Symposium and Benefit for Peace, Justice and Human Rights railed against President Bush and left the audience with a straightforward message for the 2004 presidential election: "Remember the A-B-C's -- Anything but Bush and Cheney." The message was met with unsurprising enthusiasm from the crowd. But the speaker himself had a bit of a surprising background: Scott Ritter, former U.N. chief weapons inspector, is a self-professed conservative Republican who admitted to the audience he voted for Bush three years ago.
    Since then, Ritter said, Bush has lied to the American public about the true situation in Iraq, particularly in regard to the weapons of mass destruction, which American forces, to date, have failed to locate.
    "I leave the door open that they still may find something," Ritter said to the group of 100 or so people gathered in the darkened auditorium at the San Mateo Performing Arts Center on Sunday. "But even if anything is found, it won't be anywhere near what they said it was -- thousands of tons of biological weapons."
    Ritter's new book, "Frontier Justice: Weapons of Mass Destruction and the Bushwhacking of America," published by Context Books, is due out next week.
    A 12-year veteran of the U.S. Marine Corps and an intelligence officer who served as a central weapons inspector between 1991 and 1998, Ritter said if no weapons are found, Bush's decision to wage war on Iraq should be condemned -- whether he lied or made an honest mistake.
    "If Iraq is in possession of weapons of mass destruction, they are in violation of international law," Ritter said. "If they aren't, then we are in violation of international law."
    Ritter resigned from the U.N.'s special commission in charge of inspections -- UNSCOM -- in 1998, citing interference from the U.N. Security Council as well as members of the Clinton administration.
    Ritter, who now lives in Albany, N.Y., flew out at the invitation of the Peninsula-based lobby "The 100 Year March" to speak on Iraq, as well as his beliefs on the importance of active citizenship and of fighting for constitutional rights.
    At Sunday's event -- which featured speakers from other peace and human-rights groups, including the NAACP and Peace Action of San Mateo County -- Ritter urged members of the audience to use the upcoming Fourth of July celebration as an occasion to think about what it truly means to be an American citizen.
    "Are you citizens or something else?" he asked, gesturing to the audience. "If you are consumers, you will wrap yourself in comfort, do what you can to not rock the boat. If you are citizens, you will interest yourselves in forming a community, preserving the Constitution."
    After his speech, Ritter met activists and peace lobbyists, some wearing colorful hats and beaded jewelry, who waited to thank him for his words.
    Ritter, wearing a gray suit, bright blue shirt, and yellow tie, sat near a table with John Kerry election posters. He acknowledged if someone had told him three years ago he would be speaking at a peace symposium attended largely by left-wing liberals, he wouldn't have believed it.
    "In college I was a Reagan Republican," Ritter said. "I thought it was the government's responsibility to serve the people."
    Ritter stated he's still a conservative Republican, but in his estimation, the current government has stopped serving the people.
    "I may even vote for that guy," Ritter said smiling and pointing to the John Kerry signs.
    ###
  6. by   RN2007
    Spacenurse, What is your beef? I have been part of the bulletin boards for a very short time, but since then, I have seen where you use these boards to outlash at Bush and call him a liar, etc., and you must spend a whole lot of your time trying to prove this by copying and pasting articles that you think help to support your belief.

    You know, it may be a very long time until we find out the truth about where the WMD were hidden. Bush even said this in the beginning. But regardless, we gave Sadamm many chances to come clean about what had been done with the WMD that he was supposed to have gotten rid of long ago, and for some reason Sadamm played one game after another with us, but never gave us what we needed so that we could feel comfortable that he no longer had these. Do you have a answer for this? Sadamm had already shown what he would do to his own people, etc., etc., and we all know about his hate of Bush Sr. , the U.S., etc..., so with all of his stalling and not providing the info we needed, what were we to think he was up to? After 9/11, none of us could afford to continue playing his stall game and definitely could not stand for another major bombing incident in the U.S.

    Believe it or not, I respect and believe in President Bush, Cheney, Colin Powell, and Rumsfeld, etc... All have proven to be very courageous and admirable men in my book. I can only imagine how hard it must be to be President and know that I could not hurl insults without knowing the "real inside info" by walking in all of their shoes. No, I do not believe that our administration is lying, although later on down the line it may be found that they acted on intelligience that was not totally correct, which is an entirely different story to me, and most definitely does not make Bush or the rest of them liars.

    Why don't we spend more time supporting our Presidents, regardless of who they are, rather than trying to find any spec of dirt, etc. to tear them down. Thank goodness, we do not live under the same level of scrutiny as the Presidents because it would be very uncomfortable and just not fair. I am sure I will get many flaming messages about what I have said, but I do not care because I am tired of reading this one sided garb about matters that nobody on this board including myself fully is knowledgeable about. You can quote all the articles you want but there are a lot of confidential info that only the President, etc. had for security purposes, therefore NO, we do not and should not have all the facts. Please, we need to be more respectful of those who are in office whether we voted for them or not.
    Sincerely, April
  7. by   NancyRN
    I don't understand space nurse either. What's this got to do with nursing?

    Give it a rest.
  8. by   pickledpepperRN
    Copies from June 4, 2003 post:

    spacenurse
    Senior Member

    Registered: Mar 1999
    Location: Los Angeles, CA USA
    Posts: 1682
    Thank you President Bush
    Post #1


    I am glad the President is attempting to make peace between the Israelis and
    the Palestinians.
    It is risky, but to accept there can be no peace is not OK with me.
    There will be bumps in the road of his roadmap. A detour may be needed.
    I pray peace will result.
    http://www.msnbc.com/news/801833.asp?0cv=CA01
    http://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/04/i...04CND-MIDE.html
    MSNBC STAFF AND WIRE REPORTS

    AQABA, Jordan, June 4-At a landmark summit capping a two-day visit to the
    region by President Bush, the Israeli and Palestinian prime ministers pledged
    Wednesday to follow a U.S.-backed "road map" to peace. Bush promised to
    make the plan a "matter of the highest priority" and got some promises in
    return. They included an Israeli pledge to uproot unauthorized settlements in
    the West Bank, and a Palestinian vow to end the armed struggle for a state.
    EMERGING FROM three-way talks against a backdrop of the Gulf of Aqaba,
    Bush, Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and Palestinian Prime Minister Mahmoud
    Abbas offered a measured, and at times upbeat, assessment of their talks.
    Sharon, long reluctant to enter into peace talks with the Palestinians, called
    the summit a "new opportunity of hope between Israelis and Palestinians,"
    pledging to remove unauthorized Jewish settlements in the West Bank.
    Abbas, meanwhile, said the Palestinian leadership renounced violence of any
    kind against Israelis.
    Calling such violence inconsistent with Palestinians' Islamic faith and the
    establishment of an independent state they have long sought, Abbas also
    pledged to end "the militarization of the intifada."
    "The armed intifada must end and we must use and resort to peaceful means
    in our quest to end the occupation and suffering of Palestinians and Israelis,"
    he said.
    But key questions remained over whether Abbas would be able to make good
    on his vows to persuade militants to stop attacking Israelis in a 32-month-old
    Palestinian uprising for statehood.


    | IP: Logged
    06-04-2003 11:31 PM
  9. by   KidsLuvMe
    I totally agree with, strongly back, and much appreciate your posts spacenurse. I believed in Bush and I belived in all the "intelligence". I now feel like an American SUCKER instead of an American Citizen. I really don't feel like a part of anything any more.
    I regret supporting this president and I would be greatful if our public representatives would impeach him from office, and ban any other Bush from becomming president for the next 100 years.
    (ok so they might not put a ban on the bush name but impeachment is called for here)
    He has been the downfall of our country and has brought a bad omen with him since he first took office.
    Recession - might have been unavoidable but didn't have to be this bad with a person that was willing to focus on a solution.
    Terrorist attacks - might not be Bush's fault but that is no reason to justify a war on another country... kinda reminds me of the bully who gets slapped and then goes and takes out their anger on someone smaller.
    Tax cuts - why even bother... who are you sucking up to Bush? Then again if I had dividend paying investments and I had the power to make a law that gave me tax free money would I go for it?
    Post-war Iraq - Why not prevent the looting of the gov buildings or at least go in first and sieze any important info first (but it's gone). Oh Wait we are still AT war in Iraq... hmmmmm I guess this was planned out really well from the beginning huh. Oh yeah... I guess this is where all that proof would actually come in handy. But hey put 100,000 people in a desert and they are bound to find SOMETHING right? At least we are going to get to play with all that oil though.

    Post-war me- I feel a total lack of patriotism and faith in our system. Everything that I read or hear now about anything political or Bush related gives me heartburn (going to get some chocolate milk after this). I am boycotting CNN and basically any news for glorifying this whole process and all the other tragedies of this country. (I think watching the news has depressed me more than anything, ever since the school shootings started a few years ago. Yes it's reality but it doesn't have to be glorified).

    Post-war America - Well we have a lot of debt. No credibility with our old allies. We stepped on a lot of toes and don't even intend to apologize, probably still giving France dirty looks for making the right decision. We are no safer than before (the fear they instilled in us is now gone though). We have made more enemies, revealed our military capabilities to our enemies so they will know what to prepare for, and given motivation and solidarity to more anti-american terrorists to take up arms against us. We have more to fear now than we did before the war I think. The only allies we have are the ones we pay to be our friends. (I wouldn't doubt that half of them would look the other way if they knew about something bad being planned against us) If we didn't pay anyone I don't think we would have a friend in the world and a whole lot less "influence".

    Happy 4th everyone. I hope you all are safe. I think I'll not be too enthusiastic this year because I don't feel very free or independent. At least I get the day off of work. Maybe I'll rent a movie and try to forget this whole thing ever happened. I hope that something positive happens in this country again... that sure would be different!
  10. by   RN2007
    I do not know about the rest of you, but I feel a heck of a lot safer than I did before 9/11, and more things are being done all the time to make us even safer. My God people, we do not have the whole story because it is and should be protected info, so how in the heck can we judge Bush? What the heck do you think that Sadam was stalling so much for, huh? He was hiding the WMD and/or relocating them to another country. Therefore, of course it will take a long time to find these. Remember that Sadam is very manipulative!! How would you have felt if after 9/11 we experienced attack after attack in the US like 9/11, due to our not going into Iraq to calm things down and to do what we could. Listen, Bush knew he would not win the popularity game because of this war and has said so himself, because he knew the heat he was getting from all sides, however he was smart enough and humane enough to do what a lot other presidents might not do, and went ahead into Iraq to try to resolve some problems that should have been dealt with long ago. And Yes, I know that it is still a big mess over there, but Bush explained how long and ongoing this war would be, and after all we did not start this thing!

    However, sad to say but true, but before 9/11 nobody would have backed any type of war, etc., if it were not for the tragedy of 9/11 and the mysteries that unfolded. Nobody would have believed that there really was a "boogie man" that we had to go after with such zest, etc. Sept. 11th brought to light that we had many many enemies that would kill us in terroist attacks and at any cost. Bush gave Sadam every chance to come up with the exact info that we needed, and it did not happen. Personally, I think Bush waited too long to go into Iraq, because he might have been luckier finding the WMD sooner. However, I would like to have seen another President do any better.

    In this country, it seems that we have far too many people who are unsupportive of our government and who lash out at our Presidents without the REAL information to do so. Why don't we put a little faith in our Presidents and pray for them and our country, and make more changes in our own homefronts and then our world will be a much better place to live. Let's look at ourselves, ya know - the man or woman in the mirror, and improve upon what we can with ourselves.

    Best Wishes for a Wonder July 4th.......April
  11. by   Q.
    I'd like to know how many people, who if their child was threatened at school, and had the same quality and amount of evidence of it as Bush, would have opted to "wait it out" and see if your kid really does get killed, or, would take your own protective measures to protect your kid knowing that the chance existed that it all could be correct?
  12. by   fergus51
    I don't think it's really appropriate to tell Spacenurse to lay off. The whole point of keeping this forum was so people could discuss current events. There is always the ignore feature.

    Susy, I have no kids. But, if my Chihuahua was threatenned by another dog, I would take action to keep her safe by removing her from any contact with the other dog. I can't say how that would relate to the whole Iraq issue......
  13. by   RN2007
    I just dislike how only one side of a story is being told here, and that is why I gave my 2 cents worth. And yes, I questioned why Spacenurse was so obsessive with making sure that we all read the articles, etc. that he/she cuts and pastes all over this Nurses Forum. I have a right to speak my mind as well, and that is why I am doing this in response to the bombardment of these Bush bashing articles. My point is that there is sooooo much more "Confidential" information that must be protected, that none of us are really aware of, nor should we be, and that we should not rely on these articles for the Real Truth. Many times, the real truth comes out on down the line as a war and/or problem is being resolved. I have seen so much negativism toward Bush on these threads and I think it is about time for at least a few of us to support our President. He has a darn hard job and has worked very hard for us. And yes, I could choose to just ignore what is going on here, but that is not me and I choose to make my thoughts known, just like I choose to vote at any and all elections because I want my voice heard. The differenece is that I am confident that since I have expressed my thoughts clearly, I have no need to hammer them into peoples head over and over and over, from one thread to another. Oh and personally, I feel that we have a lot to celebrate on July 4th and I know that I sure will along with many of my friends and family that feel the same. ................April

close